Note: Beginning in June 2012, opinions will be posted as Adobe PDFs. You can download a free copy of Adobe Reader here.
The summary following each opinion is prepared to offer lawyers and the public a general overview of what a particular opinion decides. The summary is not necessarily a full description of the issues discussed in an opinion.8-4-2010 - Opinions
In this wrongful discharge action against the School District of Greenville County (the District), Plaintiff Sherrie Mann McBride (McBride) seeks review of the circuit court's ruling granting a directed verdict for the District on McBride's causes of action for abuse of process, malicious prosecution, false imprisonment, and defamation of character.4719 - Pruitt v. Pruitt
In this divorce action, Raymond Pruitt (Husband) and Karen Leigh Pruitt, Husband's sister (Sister) assign several errors to the family court's final decree, including the conclusions that Sister did not loan $40,000 to Husband and that the marital home was transmuted into marital property. Husband also challenges the finding that his adultery was the sole reason for the breakup of his marriage to Karen B. Pruitt. We affirm in part, reverse in part, and remand for further proceedings.4720 - McGee v. SC Department of Motor Vehicles
The Court of Appeals reversed the administrative law court's decision to not suspend an owner's driver's license, license plate, and registration for failure to pay the uninsured motor vehicle fee for a registered and plated uninsured motor vehicle.4721 - Rutland v. SC Department of Transportation
The Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court's decision to set-off the verdict against SCDOT to zero based on the insufficiency of evidence to support a survival claim.4722 - Bennett v. Rector
Lori G. Rector (Mother) appeals from the family court's order awarding Jack David Bennett (Father) child support. Mother contends the family court erred in (1) determining the amount of child support under the Child Support Guidelines; (2) making the award retroactive; and (3) awarding Father attorney's fees. We affirm.8-11-2010 - Opinions
Ronnie W. Wilson appeals his convictions for criminal domestic violence of a high and aggravated nature (CDVHAN) and kidnapping, arguing the trial court erred in refusing to grant a mistrial after a prosecuting witness testified to Wilson's prior bad acts. We affirm.4724 - State v. Orr
Harold Orr, III appeals his convictions for first-degree criminal sexual conduct with a minor and committing a lewd act upon a minor, arguing the trial court erred in (1) denying his motion for a mistrial, (2) limiting his cross-examination of Sheila Sheppard, and (3) failing to require Officer Paulson to testify at trial pursuant to Rule 6, SCRCrimP.4725 - Ashenfelder v. City of Georgetown
In this cross-appeal, the City of Georgetown alleges the trial court erred in denying its directed verdict motions. David Ashenfelder alleges the trial court erred in granting a directed verdict on some of his causes of action prior to the declaration of a mistrial. We dismiss the appeal as premature.4726 - GEICO v. Draine
In this appeal, Eugene Draine (Draine) argues that the circuit court erred by refusing to reform his automobile insurance policy with the Government Employees Insurance Company (GEICO) to provide for underinsured motorist (UIM) coverage in an amount equal to his liability coverage. Specifically, Draine contends that section 38-77-350(E) of the South Carolina Code (2002) required GEICO to add UIM coverage to his policy when Draine, in renewing his policy, failed to return an executed UIM offer form within thirty days after receiving it from GEICO. We affirm.8-18-2010 - Opinions
Tommy Logan appeals from the trial court's order granting the Gaffney Board of Public Works' (the Board) motion to dismiss Logan's negligence action based on the statute of limitations. Logan argues the trial court erred by granting the Board's motion because discovery was not complete, and the Board's denial of any involvement caused Logan to sue only Cherokee Landscaping.4728 - State v. Latimore
In this criminal case, the court of appeals affirmed Latimore's conviction for failing to register as a sexual offender. The court disagreed with Latimore's claim that the trial court erred in denying his mistrial motion, finding the trial court's mention of Latimore's underlying conviction, despite a pre-trial stipulation to the contrary, was not prejudicial. The court also found Latimore was not entitled to a directed verdict based on his claim that he did not receive actual notice of the change in registration requirements pursuant to the amended registration statute because the State is not required to inform sexual offenders of their duty to reregister, and moreover, the statute's plain language does not require a knowing or intentional violation of the registration requirement to be subject to punishment. Last, the court of appeals found the trial court properly exercised its discretion in excluding a probation agent's testimony.8-25-2010 - Opinions
In this civil case, we must determine whether the circuit court erred in granting summary judgment in favor of Dr. Jennifer Feldman (Dr. Feldman) and Columbia Heart Clinic (collectively Respondents) on William and Ann Melton's (collectively Appellants) causes of action for medical malpractice, negligent misrepresentation, abandonment, and intentional infliction of emotional distress.4730 - Cricket Cove Ventures, LLC v. Gilland
Appellant Cricket Cove Ventures, LLC (Cricket Cove) brought this civil conspiracy action against Horry County Council Chairperson Elizabeth Gilland and Council member Harold G. Worley (collectively, Respondents), seeking relief from the County's refusal to review a sketch plan of a proposed development within Worley's electoral district. Cricket Cove challenges the circuit court's order dismissing its complaint pursuant to Rule 12(b)(8), SCRCP. We affirm the circuit court's dismissal of Cricket Cove's injunction and mandamus causes of action on the ground that they are unsustainable under Rule 12(b)(6), SCRCP. We reverse the dismissal of the civil conspiracy cause of action and remand for further proceedings.4731 - HHHunt Corporation v. Town of Lexington
Appellants HHHunt Corporation (Hunt), Eddy Huckabee, and Eugenia Mabry Huckabee (collectively Appellants) brought this action against Respondent Town of Lexington (the Town), seeking an order requiring the Town to provide water and wastewater services to the Huckabees' parcel in Lexington County, outside the Town's territorial limits. Appellants challenge the circuit court's order dismissing their complaint pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6), SCRCP. We affirm in part, reverse in part, and remand for further proceedings.